Clifford May

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Clifford May is a neoconservative activist and writer who heads the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), an advocacy group that emerged in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to push an expansive "war on terror" focusing on the Middle East. May is also a former journalist who worked for several radio, print, and TV outlets, including PBS, CBS, Newsweek, and the New York Times.[1]

May's writings often promote militarist U.S. policies on Iran and champion an Israel-centric view of Middle East. Observers have accused May of making unfounded assertions to bolster his arguments. For instance, in a January 2011 National Review Online article titled "Jihad 101," May insinuated that Iran and al-Qaeda collaborate in terrorism campaigns. He wrote, "Iran is a predominately Shia country but its revolution inspired the rise of militant groups among the more numerous Sunni Muslims of the broader Middle East as well. Al-Qaeda is only the best known. Sunni jihadis and Shia jihadis are rivals, not enemies. They cooperate and collaborate against common enemies—us, for example."[3]

But as writer Ali Gharib commented in response to the article, "the Islamic Republic of Iran and Al Qaeda are not the same thing, as any honest expert in either will tell you. The two actually hate each other. The connection that May peddles, meanwhile, is just as tenuous as when he made it about Iraq-Al Qaeda. ... As for substantiating his argument with evidence in any of these cases, May has never really gone beyond 'Well, they're all jihadis!'"[4]

Since the election of President Barack Obama, May's writings have alternately praised and condemned the Obama administration's foreign policies, depending on the degree to which they adhere to the objective of overturning "enemy" regimes and bolstering May's vision of Israeli security. Thus, for instance, in a March 2012 Scripps Howard op-ed, May praised President Obama for recognizing the "legitimacy" of Israeli concerns with respect to Iran's purported effort to develop nuclear weapons, while casting doubt on the efficacy of the sanctions supported by the president and U.S. allies. "No one with a lick of sense," wrote May, "backs sanctions because they are confident sanctions will work—with 'work' defined as causing Iran's rulers to decide to forgo the most effective weapon ever invented." Echoing a line of argument pursued by other hawkish "pro-Israel" figures like Michael Makovsky of the Bipartisan Policy Center, May argued that credible threats had to be made against Tehran: "A new round of diplomacy is scheduled to begin next month in Geneva. For there to be any small chance of success Iran's rulers will need to feel pressured and vulnerable—they will need to take seriously the possibility that Americans and/or Israelis have rocks and are prepared to use them."[5]

In an earlier op-ed for Scripps Howard published a few months after President Obama took office, May commended Obama for "not abandoning what has been achieved—at great cost—in Iraq. He is increasing the U.S. commitment in Afghanistan. He appears to appreciate the high stakes in Pakistan. Now, as in the Bush administration, Generals David Petraeus and Ray Odierno are commanding American troops in battle under the leadership of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Also consistent with the previous administration, Obama has retained such anti-terrorism tools as military commissions (with cosmetic modifications), renditions (begun during the Clinton era), and, yes, indefinite detentions of captured enemy combatants."[6]

However, by 2010, May had adopted a more critical view of the administration. In an April 2010 editorial, for example, he lambasted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for encouraging Israel to "continue building momentum toward a comprehensive peace" and respecting Palestinians' "legitimate aspirations." Characterizing these statements as "cruel" toward Israel, May wrote that Clinton "has conducted Middle East diplomacy in a way that can be described, at best, as lacking coherence. At worst—borrowing a phrase from scholar Bernard Lewis—she is helping make America appear 'harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend.'"[7]

May joined his a voice to a chorus of right-wing figures in criticizing the Obama administration's efforts to reform U.S. nuclear strategic policies, claiming that reductions to the nuclear arsenal established in the new START agreement negotiated with Russia will be seen by terrorists as an opportunity to be exploited[8] (despite that fact that the treaty will allow the United States to maintain 1,550 deployed strategic warheads). May also erroneously declared that the new START "may limit our ability to deploy additional missile defense," a view that despite its popularity on the right has been repeatedly dismissed by serious arms control specialists.[9]

May also contributed his name to a widely noted May 2010 Washington Times editorial that called for a "renewed adherence to the national security philosophy of President Ronald Reagan: 'Peace Through Strength.'" Offering a 10-point plan to protect America, the authors—who also included the Center for Security Policy's Frank Gaffney and Reagan-era figure Edwin Meese—argued that "freedom," "America's exceptional role," and even the country's very existence are at stake as a result of an astounding array of alleged threats facing the country. These threats included missile attacks, Shariah law, electromagnetic pulse weapons, Islamic terrorism, undocumented immigrants, and a weak military.[10]

Track Record

A veteran journalist, May worked as a correspondent for the New York Times, a senior editor for Geo Magazine, and an associate editor for Newsweek. He writes a weekly column that is nationally distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, and he has contributed to the National Review Online, CNN's American Morning, and National Public Radio's Morning Edition, among other outlets. In the late 1990s, May edited Rising Tide, the official magazine of the Republican Party.

In September 2007, Media Matters criticized May for failing to disclose his government ties, and those of the FDD, during media appearances. "[May] has appeared in the media several times to defend the administration's conduct of the Iraq war," the progressive media watchdog group published on their site. "However, in none of his columns or on-air appearances has May disclosed that FDD has received at least $1.2 million in State Department grants since 2004, or that May himself is a member of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's Advisory Committee on Democracy Promotion."[13]

May was also a member of the Iraq Study Group's Military and Security Working Group of Experts, which was formed in March 2006. As the Washington Post reported in December 2006: "A key recommendation of last week's Iraq Study Group report was that the Bush administration should reach out to Iran and Syria to improve the situation in Iraq. The White House has long rejected the notion, but nearly all of the 44 experts who worked on the report supported it. However, two conservative holdouts—Clifford May, a former Republican National Committee spokesman, and Reuel Marc Gerecht of the American Enterprise Institute—needed some extra convincing. In a series of e-mails, James Dobbins, a former diplomat and the chief architect of Afghan reconciliation (now at Rand Corp.) made his case. In the end, May was won over but Gerecht was not."[14]

In a September 2006 op-ed, May equated "Islamic fascists" with World War II-era fascists. Citing the work of Michael Ledeen, a scholar at AEI, May argued that "whereas the Nazis waged a war for German domination of Europe, [Ayatollah] Khomeini looked forward to a war that would spread Islamic rule throughout the Middle East and beyond." Quoting a 1942 Khomeini diatribe, in which the Iranian revolutionary claimed that "the sword is the key to paradise" and "Islam wants to conquer the whole world," May argued that "Khomeini's successors may soon have not just swords but also nuclear weapons to help them pursue their vision. Osama bin Laden's ambitions are the same though he dreams of Sunni rather than Shiite sheiks ordering infidels to convert or die." He also approvingly cited the opinions of conservative then-Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), who, according to May, recognized that "Islamic fascism" is the "ideological heir to the enemy America confronted in World War II—and is at least as serious a threat."[15]

Advocacy Affiliations

Before joining the FDD, May was director of communications for the Republican National Committee. May's corporate connections have included working as the senior managing director of Weber Shandwick, which describes itself as "one of the world's leading public relations and communications management firms."[16]

May has also served as vice-chair of the Republican Jewish Coalition and was a signatory of various statements published by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). May currently serves as chairman of the Policy Committee of the Committee on the Present Danger (CPD), which the FDD describes as a "venerable Cold War group."[17] CPD was revived by the FDD and a plank of hardline Democrats and Republicans in 2004. Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) serve as CPD's honorary co-chairmen. George Shultz and James Woolsey are the co-chairs of CPD's six-member board of directors.

May was one of several right-wing figures to sign on to a September 2007 declaration sponsored by the Forgotten American Coalition condemning the idea of withdrawal from Iraq. The coalition, spearheaded by Gary Bauer, was a letterhead organization that also hyped the threat from Iran and Syria. In July 2007, May was a panelist at the Washington, DC summit of Christians United for Israel, a gathering that he described as focusing on Israeli security and "Islamic imperialists and supremacists."[18]

May has been associated with the Henry Jackson Society, a conservative group launched in Cambridge, England in March 2005. The society was founded, in its own words, on the idea that "liberal democracy should be spread across the world; that as the world's most powerful democracies, the United States and the European Union—under British leadership—must shape the world more actively by intervention and example; that such leadership requires political will, a commitment to universal human rights, and the maintenance of a strong military with global expeditionary reach; and that too few of our leaders in Britain and the rest of Europe today are ready to play a role in the world that matches our strength and responsibilities."[19] Included among the think tank's international patrons are May and other neoconservative luminaries like Bruce Jackson, Robert Kagan, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Joshua Muravchik, and Woolsey.

May's FDD has been packed with "insiders" such as Jack Kemp, Newt Gingrich, Woolsey, Gaffney, Kristol, and Perle. An indication of the FDD's emergence as a major player in the think-tank world occurred on March 13, 2006, when President George W. Bush delivered a speech on the "Global War on Terrorism" at an FDD-sponsored event. Bush's choice of the FDD as a forum was regarded by many observers as a sign that the administration remained firmly under the thrall of neoconservative-inspired foreign policy, despite worsening problems in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East.

Bush's FDD speech highlighted not only the new prominence of the FDD, but also of Clifford May. May, who introduced the president, framed the administration's war on terrorism in Cold War terms and also incorporated the FDD's democracy vs. terrorism theme in his opening remarks: "From the moment he stood on the rubble of the World Trade Center, President Bush has demonstrated that he understands the nature of the threat facing our country and the entire Free World," said May. "We stand behind the president in his commitment, his determination to defend freedom and defeat the enemies of democratic societies."[20]

The president commended FDD's work during his speech: "The foundation is making a difference across the world, and I appreciate the difference you're making. You have trained Iraqi women and Iranian students in the principles and practice of democracy, you've translated 'democracy readers' into Arabic for distribution across the broader Middle East, you've helped activists across the region organize effective political movements—so they can help bring about democratic change and ensure the survival of liberty in new democracies. By promoting democratic ideals, and training a new generation of democratic leaders in the Middle East, you are helping us to bring victory in the war on terror—and I thank you for your hard work in freedom's cause."[21]

Share This Profile:

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Featured Profiles

The American Islamic Congress (AIC) is a controversial Muslim advocacy organization with ties to right-wing and anti-Islamic groups. AIC has received funding from the Donors Capital Fund, a group that the Center for American Progress has described as the “lifeblood of the Islamophobia network in America.” Notorious “pro-Israel” megadonor Sheldon Adelson is also a backer of AIC, along with fellow billionaire Seth Klarman. The group, which also receives government funding, has been accused of serving as a “faithful arm of soft American power in the Middle East.”

Billionaire hedge fund investor Seth Klarman is a prolific funder of an array of rightist “pro-Israel” groups. He has supported The Israel Project, the Middle East Forum, and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, among other groups. Klarman also invests in Israeli media, having established his own newspaper, the Times of Israel, in 2012. He has bemoaned growing sympathy for the Palestinians, stating: “In the West, ‘Palestinianism’—the notion that an innocent, indigenous people suffers a senseless, cruel oppression by the Jews of Israel (who ought to know better) threatens to become the standard view.”

Ron Dermer, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, has been in the spotlight for his role in organizing—and then failing to properly disclose—a controversial speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Congress. The surprise announcement of Netanyahu’s speech, which was first made by House Speaker John Boehner shortly after President Obama’s State of the Union address, spurred widespread criticism, with the White House calling it a “breach of protocol” because it had not been notified of the invitation in advance. One observer, referring to Dermer’s role in the affair, said: “In almost any other case, such bad faith and duplicity would lead a host country to ask that an ambassador be withdrawn.”

David Albright and hisInstitute for Science and International Security are widely regarded as important apolitical members of the nonproliferation community in the United States. However, a growing number of writers and experts have begun criticizing Albright’s work, particularly on Iran, and some of his critics say that he has made inaccurate claims about their work in order to counter their criticisms.

During his recent confirmation hearings, new Pentagon chief Ashton Carter gave “every indication that he would be a hard-liner at the Pentagon and a strong counterweight to administration doves.” He said that he would be “inclined” to send “defensive arms” to Ukraine and would resist efforts to speed up the closure of Guantanamo Bay. After his first trip to Afghanistan as secretary of defense, he announced the United States may slow its withdrawal of troops and keep more troops in the country than previously planned.